Norway spruce cones

General discussions of forests and trees that do not focus on a specific species or specific location.

Moderators: edfrank, dbhguru

#11)  Re: Norway spruce cones

Postby dbhguru » Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:48 pm

Gaines,

 What are the typical criticisms you've read or heard about Norway spruce, right or wrong. What are the source or sources of the criticisms?

Bob
Robert T. Leverett
Co-founder and Executive Director
Native Native Tree Society
Co-founder and President
Friends of Mohawk Trail State Forest
User avatar
dbhguru
 
Posts: 3958
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:34 pm
Location: Florence, Massachusetts
Has Liked: 3 times
Has Been Liked: 1051 times
Print view this post

#12)  Re: Norway spruce cones

Postby gnmcmartin » Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:16 pm

Bob:

  Just a couple of examples I can find immediately:  Knowing Your trees, 1964 edition, says this: "Norway spruce usually begins to deteriorate before reaching 60 feet, and seldom lives more than 100 years."  And this from The guide to Garden Trees and Shrubs, by Norman Taylor: "A ubiquitous second rate evergreen, but not long lived, and becoming straggly with age."  The forester I talked to about HWA said the same kinds of things you are hearing up in MA--that the tree is ugly, are not long lived with stands very early becoming overmature, and are best removed ASAP.

  Of course, some of the prejudice may come from those who object to "exotic" species being grown in the US.  Other people have different "aesthetic" preferences.  One person I talked to--not a tree aficionado, as such--said "I don't like trees with space between the branches."

  Anyway, Norway spruce is not an especially long-lived tree, with a Maximum, in a few cases, of something like 400 years, but reliably 200 plus.  It also CAN become "straggly" in appearance when old when not growing on an appropriate soil. In that regard, although very adaptable generally, it is does not do well in soils low in Magnesium content.  Also, some strains are less appropriate than others for the climates where they are planted.

  So, I won't say that there has been no basis at all for the negative "press" that NS has received.  But, a big problem is that a tree's "reputation," and NS has long had a bad one in some quarters, influences how one sees a tree. Michael Dirr wrote his description of NS as he did originally, even though he spent a lot of time at Michigan State University, where the campus is full of wonderful specimens, which he readily admitted in our conversation. For a long time, I myself was influenced by what I had read. Of course, another factor, perhaps in part motivating Dirr's original account in his book, is a preference for other trees and other spruces.

  When I bought the large second parcel of my timberland up in the MD mountains, there was an extensive planting of NS.  My thought was to have them removed.  Then one day as I was driving up into PA to visit some antique stores with my wife, I decided to stop and walk down into the extensive older NS plantation along Route 40 west of Keyser's ridge. I did this because of my interest in trees/forests generally, not because of any expectations.  My eyes suddenly opened--wow! I was reminded, at least a bit, of the wonderful forests in the Pacific NW.

  We then proceeded up to Addison PA and stopped at the Augustine craft shop.  Right there were some large old NS trees--really, really nice ones. I said to myself, "what??" I made a point of talking to the owner, and asked about the trees.  I can't now remember exactly how old he said they were, but they were very old--I think he said 175 years or something.  If they are still there, add 25 years now.

  Well, my eyes were opened.  As soon as I got back from GC and had time, I was on the phone, "big time."  I think I talked to everyone in the US who had any interest or knowledge of NS, or I really tried to, with each person leading me to one or two more.  I spent hours and hours and hours.  One of the people I found was Jim Kokenderfer at the USFS experiment/research station in Parson's WV.  He loved NS, and led me to his favorite stands in WV, including the one near Glady, and so it went, and I became a big NS enthusiast.

  And then I found John Genys who I mentioned earlier, and I worked to help him get seed from various provenances for his trial.  I collected from all the stands I knew of, and solicited seed samples from several seed suppliers.

  Of course, the "Nexus" of NS love was at SUNY Syracuse, with Ed White leading, with others, including Charles Maynard, in the supporting cast.  Charles Maynard was an important part of the team that did the gene transfer to create a blight-resistant, or "immune" stain of American chestnut. Charles Maynard has established at least one provenance trail of NS, and is overseeing two others established years earlier.

  I also talked to people who knew something about the history of NS planting in "the New World," and "cultural" aspects, such as the tradition of planting "bride and groom" trees, etc. And, as a part of all this, I found and had measured--at the time--the national champion NS on the campus of Hamilton College.  My name never got associated with that tree, because someone else had seen it and mentioned it to AF without my knowledge. But no one ever followed up until I arranged for the official measurement.

  But, In spite of my current enthusiasm for this species, I must admit, I was blinded to NS's virtues for a long time, so I am not quick to rant against those still similarly blinded.

  --Gaines
Last edited by gnmcmartin on Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
gnmcmartin
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Winchester, VA
Has Liked: 12 times
Has Been Liked: 77 times
Print view this post

#13)  Re: Norway spruce cones

Postby dbhguru » Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:10 pm

Gaines,


 Thanks very much. You've given me a lot of useful information to share with others about the Norways.

Bob
Robert T. Leverett
Co-founder and Executive Director
Native Native Tree Society
Co-founder and President
Friends of Mohawk Trail State Forest
User avatar
dbhguru
 
Posts: 3958
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:34 pm
Location: Florence, Massachusetts
Has Liked: 3 times
Has Been Liked: 1051 times
Print view this post

#14)  Re: Norway spruce cones

Postby gnmcmartin » Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:03 am

Bob, and others interested in Norway spruce:

  I left out a couple of important things related to poor performing Norway spruce.  One problem for landscape/ornamental plantings is its high sensitivity to weed control lawn chemicals. I don't have any data on specific chemicals and the application rates that can cause NS problems, but damage to Norway spruce is quite common, usually leading to the thin scraggly appearance, and/or death. Colorado spruce I believe is sensitive also, and perhaps other spruces.  But the problem seems to be worse for NS than any other tree.

  Next, Norway spruce has a habit of "hanging on to life" in very harsh conditions rather than dying quickly as do many other trees. I had a discussion about this with Charles Maynard of SUNY Syracuse, and he explained by saying that Norway spruce is a robust species.  I can't now remember exactly how he defined "robust" in this context, but the gist is that the tree is very strong in the face of various kinds of "adversity," and "chooses" to reduce its foliage and adjust to the harsh conditions, whatever they are, rather than dying, as some other trees would do. Hence, we see more poor specimens than would otherwise be the case. My own observations of certain individual trees suggests that NS can often recover from severe stresses, and sometimes return to full health, but that takes time.

  And, while I have your attention: I mentioned that a study was done at SUNY Syracuse of growth curves. What was found in their extremely meticulous study is that after a NS tree reaches 4.5 feet in height (trees can be slow starters),  for the next 50 years the growth rate is absolutely steady, with no decline, even at the 50-year mark. Virtually all other trees grown in the NE quadrant of the US show a decline during the first fifty years, so the line on the graph bends over, so to speak. For NS the line on the graph is absolutely straight. Not long after age 50, or 60, the growth rate of NS does decline significantly. On the best sites in central NY, in the 50 years after achieving 4.5 feet, NS grows to a height of about 114 feet. On my timberland, they seem to be doing slightly better than that.

  Eastern white pine shows a radically different growth curve, quickly accelerating to a very fast growth rate, and then very substantially declining between the ages of something like 30 to 50 or so, so that at that point, NS is growing faster. On my timberland, if the NS is not overtopped by white pine early, the height of the two species is essentially equal at age 50. After age 50 or 60, I believe that white pine may take the lead in growth rate again, but I have no data to back that up.

  The site factors study done at SUNY has one or two somewhat surprising results, perhaps the most unusual is that position on a slope, and aspect, have no impact, at least in Central NY, where the study was done. Of course, position on a slope usually affects soil depth and texture, but in isolation from other factors, whether a tree is growing high or low on a SW facing slope, or a NE facing slope, makes no difference.

  Also, In a study that as far as I know, remains unpublished, SUNY did a thorough study of NS root growth, at least on one or two soils. Edwin White summed this up by saying that NS roots grow extremely aggressively, and that they "very efficiently fill up the available soil."  If anyone ever visits my timberland, I can show one very special aspect of NS root growth. One thing that I have observed is that the roots of NS that often grow very near the surface, do so even in somewhat dry climates like that here in Winchester, VA, and even where the soil is well drained and deep. These roots also can extend far from the tree.  What???

  Well, I won't say that NS is my favorite species of tree, or that it is superior to eastern white pine, or whatever, but in the face of all the negative stuff that has been published about the species, I have taken on the job of "setting the record straight."  And, in addition to its beauty, NS has some especially interesting and remarkable characteristics. I was wonderfully pleased when I found that many NTS members share my appreciation of Norway spruce.

  --Gaines
User avatar
gnmcmartin
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Winchester, VA
Has Liked: 12 times
Has Been Liked: 77 times
Print view this post

#15)  Re: Norway spruce cones

Postby dbhguru » Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:52 pm

Gaines,

  We are indebted to you for this very useful information. I plan to make maximum use of it to promote the Buckland State Forest Norway spruces.

Bob
Robert T. Leverett
Co-founder and Executive Director
Native Native Tree Society
Co-founder and President
Friends of Mohawk Trail State Forest
User avatar
dbhguru
 
Posts: 3958
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:34 pm
Location: Florence, Massachusetts
Has Liked: 3 times
Has Been Liked: 1051 times
Print view this post

#16)  Re: Norway spruce cones

Postby Joe » Tue Apr 18, 2017 2:02 pm

Since some species here in New England are lost or not doing well, the chestnut, elm, hemlock and others- it's not wise for the state to dislike NS as it does. It's just not rational.

But, what happens in forestry is that- by and large- it's not a sophisticated profession. Once the word goes out about some desired policy- everyone else just sings that tune. Disagreeing with that tune does not advance your career. This is true in many career paths, but particularly bad in forestry.
Joe
User avatar
Joe
 
Posts: 1728
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 9:26 am
Location: Massachusetts
Has Liked: 0 times
Has Been Liked: 169 times
Print view this post

#17)  Re: Norway spruce cones

Postby gnmcmartin » Tue Apr 18, 2017 4:15 pm

Joe:

  In Maryland, a land owner can't get any Forestry Incentives Program (FIP) assistance to plant any non-native species, including, of course, Norway spruce. A few years ago--last time I checked--one could apply for a waiver for a planting of 5% of any re-forestation project.  This strict limitation is after so many native species are threatened or wiped out, including hemlocks--and while the overpopulation of deer makes planting white pine potentially a waste. And all this while, it seems to me, not nearly enough is being invested in trying to control HWA. For control of HWA on my timberland--and my timberland is a "nexus" of fine hemlock growth of considerable ecological value--I can get NO state support. The only recommendation--they WILL make a recommendation--is to cut and sell hemlock while I can. But plant NS, or larch, or any other "alien" species--no! No support for that either. Maybe having our forests reduced to fewer and fewer species is fine.

  Of course, at my own expense, I can plant what I want.  Will a law be passed to prevent that? Well, I can bear the planting expense myself since I can do the work, and am happy to do it, but can other landowners?

  --Gaines
User avatar
gnmcmartin
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Winchester, VA
Has Liked: 12 times
Has Been Liked: 77 times
Print view this post

Previous

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest